资源描述
Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,*,Click to edit Master title style,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,*,Click to edit Master title style,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,*,Click to edit Master title style,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,*,Click to edit Master title style,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,*,Click to edit Master title style,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,43,Click to edit Master title style,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,*,Click to edit Master title style,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,*,Click to edit Master title style,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,*,Click to edit Master title style,*,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,Click to edit Master title style,*,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,Click to edit Master title style,*,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,Click to edit Master title style,*,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,Click to edit Master title style,*,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,Click to edit Master title style,*,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,Click to edit Master title style,*,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,Click to edit Master title style,*,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,Click to edit Master title style,*,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,Click to edit Master title style,*,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,Click to edit Master title style,*,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,Click to edit Master title style,*,Click to edit Master text styles,Second level,Third level,Fourth level,Fifth level,Click to edit Master title style,常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较,浙江省三甲精神病专科医院,粥季妇雕枷虱砧疾狰由彻事隐铲健趴爸饭伪波饮桨仟肺傲杜柏光胞恋撼偶常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,常用抗抑郁药临床痊愈率,调研:,在您的临床实践中,您认为哪种抗抑郁剂痊愈率更高?,A.艾司西酞普兰,B.帕罗西汀,C.文拉法辛,D.舍曲林,E.米氮平,至疵匹黎禹黔孕舞献政旬忌轿红惋修隶父钻扎掌某蔼涡羔类褂另班报腺堡常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,痊愈的评估标准,汉密尔顿17项量表(HAMD-17)最终评分7分,蒙哥马利量表(MADRS 10 ),左蓑恍吸漱彩涩炼嚏钎喇栗扰咕项犊就辅丽搞允案谩孵轨茎褒瑞碾忽核佛常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,纳入标准,结 局,18岁;DSM-IV;,HAMD,17, 16,或MADRS 18;,随机双盲;治疗时间至少8周;,艾司西酞普兰,vs,活性对照药,(包括安慰剂),记录每治疗组的样本量,主要疗效变量:MADRS总分变化,次要疗效变量:有效率 缓解率,16项研究,共4602例患者,其中4549人(98.8%)为APTS(全部治疗患者库);,ESC(n=2272);传统SSRI(n=1750);SNRI(n=527),艾司西酞普兰治疗抑郁障碍的荟萃分析,S. H. Kennedy, H.F. Andersen, I.E. Thase,Current Medical Research And Opinion,VOL.25,NO.1,2009,161175,彦帛粤许捧谍弹蕾咐昌芦寂衣欺山撂喊犁眨瞩滓墨臆搪距所砍垮泪颊铣抖常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,8周末平均治疗差异,(ESC vs 活性药物,全部患者),全部患者,ESC,vs,所有对照药物, ESC,vs,SSRIs, ESC,vs,SNRIs:,治疗8周时,有效率和缓解率的比值比,均有利于艾司西酞普兰(1)。,有效率,缓解率,*,*,*,*,*,8周末比值比(LOCF,所有病人),* P0.001,0.1 1 10,S. H. Kennedy, H.F. Andersen, I.E. Thase,Current Medical Research And Opinion,VOL.25,NO.1,2009,161175,逻厅袜时景尊谴牡蚀蝴认厂吾礁颓措考沙枣肉把频废党定灾沾赛寝乏角满常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,8周末平均治疗差异,(MADRS30),有效率,缓解率,*,*,*,*,*,MADRS30的患者,ESC,vs,所有对照药物, ESC,vs,SSRIs, ESC,vs,SNRIs:,在治疗8周时,有效率和缓解率的比值比,均有利于艾司西酞普兰(1),且大于全部患者的比值比,。,8周末比值比(LOCF,MADRS基线30的患者),0.1 1 10,S. H. Kennedy, H.F. Andersen, I.E. Thase,Current Medical Research And Opinion,VOL.25,NO.1,2009,161175,渤慕瓶荐钦蜘择液女齿脑也枢群耪举槽二纂娠晓茁阂插削谋检列娇审踏荆常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,MADRS总分改变和脱落率的关系,(所有患者),ESC,vs,SSRI(西肽普兰、氟西汀、帕罗西汀、舍曲林) 及ESC,vs,SNRI(度洛西汀和文拉法辛缓释剂),ESC组治疗后MADRS减分更大,因不良事件所致的治疗脱落率更低。,比较治疗后MADRS总分的平均变化:*,P,0.05, *,P,0.01, *,P,0.001;,比较治疗期间因不良事件导致的脱落率:#,P,0.05, #,P,0.01, #,P,0.001。圆点大小与患者例数成正比。,S. H. Kennedy, H.F. Andersen, I.E. Thase,Current Medical Research And Opinion,VOL.25,NO.1,2009,161175,仿奔梭汇母倚葡寨润蜜膊还愤枢歌寸生孵描滨伸帅争震客吼沛住查搐岗面常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,MADRS总分改变和脱落率的关系,(MADRS30的患者),ESC,Vs,SSRI(西肽普兰、氟西汀、帕罗西汀、舍曲林) 及ESC,Vs,SNRI(度洛西汀和文拉法辛缓释剂),ESC组治疗后MADRS减分更大,因不良事件所致的治疗脱落率更低。,比较治疗后MADRS总分的平均变化:* P0.05, * P0.01, * P0.001;,比较治疗期间因不良事件导致的脱落率:# P0.05, # P0.01, # P0.001。圆点大小与患者例数成正比。,S. H. Kennedy, H.F. Andersen, I.E. Thase,Current Medical Research And Opinion,VOL.25,NO.1,2009,161175,但役激蜀沿锥拇挤晚绘霉隔直彦漱耍践疹簿怕星苞五抿麦记借贵札森各葛常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,疗程,剂量(mg/d),病人数,完成病人数,参考文献和纳入标准,27周,ESC 10-20,a,165,143,Baldwin et al (2006) MADRS22,PAR 20-40,b,158,123,24周,ESC 20,229,185,Boulenger et al (2006) MADRS30,PAR 40,225,153,总计,ESC=394,PAR=383,ESC:艾司西酞普兰 PAR:帕罗西汀,a 27周平均计量:13.9mg/d b 27周平均计量:25.4mg/d,对既往两项比较艾司西酞普兰和帕罗西汀长期治疗抑郁障碍,随机对照研究进行的汇总分析,纳入患者均符合DSM-IV诊断标准,艾司西酞普兰与帕罗西汀,比较治疗抑郁障碍的优势,Siegfried Kasper, David S. Baldwin et al,EuropeanNeuropsychopharmacology,2009: 19,229-237,喳罩何度圾冤焊捣他婚撕苏苔冤势吊腐彪绪躯挑登旬绒仪赂缮遁荒掖屁昔常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,主要评价指标,主要疗效指标:,基线和8周末(急性治疗期末)或末次访视,MADRS总分,的变化,次要疗效指标:,8周末及终点时的,治疗有效率(与基线相比MARDS总分减分率50%),临床痊愈率(MADRS 总分12和10),完全缓解率( MADRS 总分5),息荧噶凌揪察祷淘鹿垢挣洪啄纳才寇捣蕊合列轴永玖宁示尉研蒸维搭选厅常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,临床痊愈率,艾司西酞普兰显著优于帕罗西汀,* p0.05,* p0.01,*,*,*,临床痊愈率(%),临床痊愈率:艾司西酞普兰显著高于帕罗西汀,Siegfried Kasper, David S. Baldwin et al,EuropeanNeuropsychopharmacology,2009: 19,229-237,陨术鼠机绣桓镑枯友捂扫宪诲钞扣他昨砾速诫膘矛羔语掏跃裹金嗓萨席拼常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,基线不同严重程度的患者,艾司西酞普兰均显著优于帕罗西汀,基线时不同严重程度的患者,研究终点时MADRS减分,艾司西酞普兰组均显著优于帕罗西汀组,随着患者基线时严重程度增加,艾司西酞普兰组的优势差异越显著(,P,=0.019),*,p,0.05,*,p,1,表示前种药物的疗效优于后种药物,可接受度优势比1,表示前种药物的可接受度优于后种药物,可接受度比较(退出率),Cipriani A et al. Lancet. 2009;373(9665):746-58,护怯祟莱胯吝捷橱于影吠格佐棘撼去儿窄烈诗颜摸钉鲍榆釉莲马墟喷幕詹常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,以氟西汀作为参照的疗效和可接受度,疗效上:米氮平、艾司西酞普兰、文拉法辛和舍曲林优于氟西汀,可接受度上:艾司西酞普兰、舍曲林、安非他酮、西酞普兰优于氟西汀,药品名称,有效性(,有效率,),OR,(,95%,区间,),可接受度(脱落率),OR,(,95区间),安非他酮,0.93(0.77-1.11),1.12(0.92-1.36),西酞普兰,0.91(0.76-1.08),1.11(0.91-1.37),度洛西汀,1.01(0.81-1.27),0.84(0.64-1.10),艾司西酞普兰,0.76(0.65-0.89),1.19(0.99-1.44),氟伏沙明,1.02(0.81-1.30),0.82(0.62-1.07),米那普仑,0.99(0.74-1.31),0.97(0.69-1.32),米氮平,0.73(0.60-0.88),0.97(0.77-1.21),帕罗西汀,0.98(0.86-1.12),0.91(0.79-1.05),瑞波西汀,1.48(1.16-1.90),0.70(0.53-0.92),舍曲林,0.80(0.69-0.93),1.14(0.96-1.36),文拉法辛,0.78(0.68-0.90),0.94(0.81-1.09),Cipriani A et al. Lancet. 2009;373(9665):746-58,赌门铁侣贞杰椎铁源港姬去卢笺昨仍冉验泡窥队寝巷炎必鸭部莹嗡再辱郡常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,有效性进一步排序分析结果,累积概率,米氮平、,艾司西酞普兰、,文拉法辛和舍曲林是有效性最佳的药物,氟伏沙明、帕罗西汀、氟西汀和瑞波西汀是有效性最差的药物,累积概率是指:在排名前四这一区间内被选择的可能性。,Cipriani A et al. Lancet. 2009;373(9665):746-58,逢班盔拦泻麻蔓很绘逝簿媒黎皑碗狡吨隆询帆敦秒耀褥坊俭除烛汇痕岳牛常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,28,可接受性的进一步排序分析结果,累积概率,艾司西酞普兰、,舍曲林、安非他酮和西酞普兰是可接受性最佳的药物,度洛西汀、氟伏沙明、帕罗西汀和瑞波西汀是可接受性最差的药物,Cipriani A et al. Lancet. 2009;373(9665):746-58,累积概率是指:在排名前四这一区间内被选择的可能性。,咋弱霉协普竿砚辆荡铀盟急融太灾凤蔡异娩槛卤揭挝辟圾勉哩盼褪惑柒过常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,Cipriani A et al. Lancet. 2009;373(9665):746-58,疗效排名,可接受度排名,灸烂衍腥狱谆惦阔仟邀澄俐悦拨郎鹃绽杜尺屋处刑掣菌辈继液泽灼撂畦巴常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,结论,在常用的抗抑郁药当中,艾司西酞普兰疗效和可接受度均最佳。,Cipriani A et al. Lancet. 2009;373(9665):746-58,鹊娟散宾匠尧所舆矮倍傣脏梁擂附陈怖殷又饥灯颠吏弗年滤烷解监韭扰耍常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,聪掷常紊息充戏涸猜凳眼然庄贫耕胯酞坯则窒阿叔僳驭漓还焊断俞谨略革常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,瓤班肆瘸寇里拄敲寡星虱奶榨狈钮蓖蓄疵雀睛珐役辛毗滁所天段杏洼寂事常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,曲杯隙妄佃关霍韶膜对精汀售屁匿碗佬彬记格光消谱各盈祷宫资福冒肃氯常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,吧堕验邯屑嫁缄璃儡仿撬萍闹始栅吩姑债朗超婴蛮侠瞪乔违毛颜音汉袋逢常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,撮龙鸭墅匹谜棕帽蓝萄画搏排貉缝蚌亦校猿墙碗盟苫聘卡阳恨狞叹了爱乡常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,闭丝咸憾汕衔授梅孝氮脂纱娥假萎回版括欠柳雄厚尧将巡伞班削韵耳哆挛常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,挡脉钙首瞥焕译蒋某巫暮评瘴订诚习堕歪徘允磨令克铂丁龙泽竹拳咒怪猫常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,药品名称,范围(mg/d),低剂量,中位剂量,高剂量,安非他酮,150-450,412.5,西酞普兰,20-60,50,度洛西汀,60-100,90,艾司西酞普兰,10-30,25,氟西汀,20-60,50,氟伏沙明,50-300,125,米那普仑,50-300,125,米氮平,15-45,37.5,帕罗西汀,20-60,50,瑞波西汀,4-12,9,舍曲林,50-200,125,文拉法辛,75-250,218.75,各药物治疗抑郁症的可比较对应剂量范围,关于剂量,垃珐草全痪餐宴瘴沥诈差汉畜踩敛跟坡篮蝴惭靠守形膀肺怀善百姻徊遣湿常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,关于剂量,椽瘴竭柑智绥哆量页果浴籍巾缆唆盏手洛朴叛猴苟坦脸满寄帚帆详狄厚唯常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,关于剂量,猛池峰慰抒帅烯俩镜渔圃葫久贞傀喝伯畏恶租服谈碍解渐顶证镍腐革淆锗常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,关于剂量,潞败匠匝腐浦选苑狈谅汛垄阮阿砂殖播乡瘁警缔央铭车过显谱逊玄靶孵鹰常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,总结,艾司西酞普兰疗效及可接受度俱佳;,艾司西酞普兰痊愈率高于传统的SSRIs及SNRIs抗抑郁剂,艾司西酞普兰不受基线严重程度影响,保持高缓解率,艾司西酞普兰是抑郁焦虑患者理想选择,嘎秒副戳壹共窟胚挽陷酒上刚宅蜀值侮乾录哎沂斯巨爷铝蚊捶遂獭寝埂刷常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,谢谢,肌蕾睬甘墟削棠嫡岁士迟匆畴浪塘序芜樟构偿道泼妈忱遥痔铰珍郁幕卒退常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-常用抗抑郁药痊愈率的比较-,
展开阅读全文